iStockphoto, launches editorial collection, enhances search tools

Prices sustainable?

One wonders what sort of price they plan to put on the pictures? Sensible or the usual unsustainable rubbish that we have become accustomed to from them. The editorial industry is in a bad enough state as it is without them making it even worse.

re:

Depressing really. At least Alamy offer the photographer something approaching 'fair'. Dreamstime and Shutterstock offer editorial images and you can expect to be paid around $0.25c for a XS image.

Microstock began as an image dump for amateurs, the professionals became involved and amateurs left, then the prices hit rock bottom but the professionals remained. Subs are even worse now - seeing a high-res XL image going for 25c, it's depressing.

A recent incident involving TIME using an image of a jar full of pennies for their front cover perhaps demonstrates the nature of Microstock. The image was bought for around $15.00. Time has a massive circulation and an advertising revenue to match. The end result was good for everyone but the photographer. Royalty Free has let the gene out of the bottle. The fact that microstock are now going to attack editorial is hardly surprising. I wonder what the response will be from AP, Reuters and Getty?

Real Reason

This article missed the real reason for this changeover in search: the company has added more "premium" images and eliminated the former Advanced Search option to weed these out. Now, it advertises images "as low as" about $3 for extra small, but in order to find those, you have to manually sift through tons of images you're asked to pay $80 or more for an extra small. Overnight, iStockPhoto went from being the friend of the little guy to a "big-business only" kind of site.

Rebel Satellite, thanks for the other suggestions. I've been emailing iStock, but they haven't deemed me worthy of a response; I suppose the paltry $300 a year I spend with them is nothing compared to their corporate accounts and doesn't merit me a reply. Pity I just paid another $120 for credits, but when those are used up I'll explore options with some of those other stock photography companies. I can't be bothered to spend a half hour looking for a picture that doesn't cost an arm and a leg when it used to take two minutes.

No, not yet

The article says the contributors can already submit for editorial, but this is not (yet) true.